Oh looky here. Turns out the campaign of Lt. Gov. John Rodgers made “major errors” in its campaign finance filings.
Well, I’m sure Rodgers accepted full responsibility like the Real ManTM he is — wait, what? He blamed the campaign finance reporting system?
Yep.
“The system sucks,” Rodgers told Seven Days in a moment of sober reflection.
Shall we assume that when he shoots at a deer and misses, he slams his gun on the ground and stomps it into little pieces?
Continue reading
Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas’ brand spanking new campaign finance portal is up and running, and boy howdy, is it an improvement on the old system. Much more information readily available, searchable, downloadable. Too bad nobody in the media, with the occasional exception of VTDigger, pays any attention to campaign finance anymore because (a) the entire idea behind campaign finance law is that sunshine disinfects, but that doesn’t work if the cleanup crews are off the clock, and (b) the new system makes the task much easier.
One huge improvement is the ability to track individual donors. Previously, donor records were extremely difficult to work with. Frequent benefactors would have numerous records, each one bearing a slightly different spelling or punctuation of their name or contact information. If I wanted to track, say, ultraconservative megadonor Lenore Broughton, I’d have to open and review literally dozens of files.
Now all I have to do is click on the “Contributions” button and type Broughton’s name into the “Contributor Name” field, and I can see all her donations to Vermont candidates and organizations in one list. So I can report that so far in 2024, Broughton has shoveled a total of $28,420 into Vermont’s political ecosystem. (This doesn’t include her federal activity; she’s given a whopping $82,700 to federal candidates and organizations in 2024. Including such worthies as Speaker Mike Johnson, Sen. Josh Hawley, unsuccessful Senate hopefuls Eric Hovde of Wisconsin and Kari Lake of Arizona, and an org called Black Americans Political Action Committee, which bears a strong smell of astroturf. She also gave $2,000 to Scary Eagle Man Gerald Malloy. Because he was a federal candidate, that donation was reported to the Federal Elections Commission, not the Vermont Secretary of State.)
The system isn’t perfect. I came across one instance where a donor I think of as an adjutant Baron, Robert Lair, had his name misspelled as “Liar,” so one of his donations didn’t appear with the others. Oh well.
But hey, let’s get to the point, shall we? This being the fifth paragraph already.
Continue reading
Secretary of State Sarah Copeland Hanzas gave it the old college try. This year, after every campaign finance reporting deadline, she published lists of all candidates who failed to file as required by law. This was aimed at encouraging compliance, if only by the embarrassment of being publicly identified as a scofflaw.
It was a good idea, but it didn’t work. The proof? The most recent list of non-compliers, released after the December 15 deadline for Final Reports, was by far the longest of all the lists. Proof that avoidance of embarrassment meant nothing whatsoever to candidates for public office.
The list is actually three lists: Those who filed, those who filed an “Under Threshold” report (didn’t raise or spend $500 or more), and those who just let the deadline fly by. And yes, if your campaign had no reportable activity, you’re still required to officially attest to that fact.
Among statewide candidates, only two are in the failed-to-file category: Republican candidate for treasurer (and Republican National Commitee member) Joshua Bechhoefer and, um, incumbent Auditor Doug Hoffer. Oopsie.
It gets really embarrassing when you get to legislative candidates. The list of Senate scofflaws is almost as long as the list of those who complied. A total of 30 Senate candidates, including seven winners, did not file a Final Report. In the House, 105 candidates failed to file, including (by my count) 32 winners.
Continue reading
Update 12/26: Turns out a complaint has already been filed about Herron’s campaign finance. See note below.
Hey, remember this guy? Jason Herron, ultraconservative from Guilford who ran as a Democrat in the August primary and lost to real Democrat Zon Eastes?
Well, Mr. Herron apparently checked out after his loss, because he has yet to file any campaign finance reports since August 1. And his last report constitutes an egregious violation of state law.
As of August 1, Herron had reported spending $7,565 and raising zero dollars. That’s right, he reported no donations to his campaign and did not identify the source of his cash.
After August 1, Herron filed three separate Mass Media expenditure reports: $500 to J and B’s Curbside Café and two identical filings reporting $2,229 spent at Staples for postcards and mailing. If you give him the benefit of the doubt for sloppy reporting, he spent $2,729 after August 1. If you take his filings at face value, which is how the law works, then he spent a total of $4,458 at Staples for a post-August 1 total of $4,958.
Which brings his total campaign spending to either $10,294 or $12,023. Which is a hell of a lot for a House primary contest.
And his fundraising remains at an officially reported zero.
Continue reading
When last we looked at Lieutenant-Governor-Elect John Rodgers’ campaign finances, we saw that he was nearly $53,000 in the red as of the November 19 filing deadline.
Well, now the final numbers are in — and Rodgers’ deficit has grown even larger.
His December 15 filing, which is the last one for the campaign cycle and is officially attested to as his FINAL REPORT all caps, shows total fundraising of $216,468 and total expenditures of $284,588.01.
That’s a shortfall of $68,120.01.
In percentage terms, Rodgers overspent his income by 31.5%.
It’s a curious situation for a common-sense fiscal conservative “balancin’ the books around the kitchen table” kind of guy.
Continue reading
The last pre-election round of campaign finance reports is in, not that anyone in the media noticed. To me, the single biggest note is that the Barons of Burlington and their allies are continuing to throw big money at John Rodgers, Republican candidate for lieutenant governor and alleged rural populist. In the first half of October, Rodgers raised $20,250; in the second half, he took in an extraordinary $69,259, almost erasing the cash advantage held by incumbent Prog/Dem David Zuckerman throughout the campaign. Not quite, but almost.
Of that $69,259, a full $58,199 was in increments of $1,000 or more.
That’s more than 83% of Rodgers’ total takings between October 16 and 31.
Son of the soil, my Aunt Fanny.
Here’s another way to slice the bologna. During the period, Rodgers took in a scant $2,560 in gifts of $100 or less. That’s a mere 3.7% of his total.
Which is S.O.P. for Rodgers’ campaign as a whole. He’s raised $212,443 so far, but only $8,809 in gifts of $100 or less. That’s only 4.1% of his total.
Continue reading
Well, it’s not literally last call, but in practical terms it’s pretty damn late. Thanks to universally accessible mail-in voting, the longer a candidate waits to spend money, the less impactful it will be. As a result, some candidates (whose fundraising perhaps outpaced expectations) seem to be shoveling money out the door as quickly as they can.
First, a note about the calendar. In the home stretch of a campaign, the deadlines come thick and fast. Candidates are required to file on October 1, October 15, and November 1. Also, in the 45 days before an election they’re required to report any mass media expenditures of $500 or more within 24 hours. The rationale, I believe, is to provide as much clarity as possible about late-stage campaign activity. The problem is, gaining clarity would require (a) each voter diligently poring over the reports, or (b) robust media coverage of campaign spending. The former is an impossible ask, and the latter is largely a thing of the past given the tremendously reduced ranks of our political press corps.
Anyway. There’s little earthshaking in the new reports; they only cover two weeks. But there are some items worthy of note, and here they are.
Continue reading
You’ve got to give Lenore Broughton credit for persistence. Or maybe slam her for testing that old saying about the definition of insanity. Because she is, in #vtpoli-land, the living embodiment of doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Broughton is Vermont’s leading ultraconservative donor. She’s spent $32,620 this year on Vermont political organizations and politicians, and the vast majority are losing causes. (She’s also dropped more than $50,000 so far on the federal level, none of which has gone to Vermont Congressional hopefuls Gerald Malloy or Mark Coester.)
She’s been backing the wrong horses for so long that one might wonder if a candidate might, upon receiving a missive from her, scrawl “Return to Sender” on the envelope and drop it in the nearest mailbox. Problem is, most of ’em can’t afford to. Unlike the candidates backed by the Barons of Burlington, most of the people Broughton supports don’t have any cash to spare.
For those unfamiliar, Broughton is the famously reclusive Burlington resident with a strong aversion to being photographed. (A Seven Days piece from 2012 about a successful attempt to take her picture no longer includes the image, perhaps because the photographer later expressed regret over the whole thing. VTDigger snapped a photo of her at a public meeting, but she was holding a piece of paper over her face.)
Continue reading
Correction. I got a crucial detail wrong in this post. Donors do not file information. The donor info is gleaned from candidate filings. Misspellings and carelessness with donor names and addresses is their fault, not the donors’. The broader point remains, that the blizzard of typos makes it extremely difficult to track donor activity, but that’s not the result of their malfeasance, deliberate or otherwise. Also, my apologies for the delay in correcting; I’ve still got Covid and have precious little energy at all.
In what’s generally been an underwhelming primary season to date, one of the biggest developments has been the outpouring of support going from a bunch of Burlington-area business leaders to a relative handful of candidates. Look at the donor lists of the top earners and you see a bunch of the same guys (well, almost entirely guys) giving four-figure checks to the same people: Stewart Ledbetter, Scott Beck, Elizabeth Brown, John Rodgers, Pat Brennan, etc.
It would be highly instructive to track how much each of these minor tycoons is investing in political centrism and where they’re putting down their markers. And it’s almost impossible to do so, thanks to how the Secretary of State’s campaign finance portal processes donor reports and how the donors seem to be taking full advantage of a loophole on offer.
What’s happening is that donors submit reports with slightly different iterations of their names and addresses. When you search for donors, each report shows up as if it’s a separate person. For instance, if you search for “Lisman, B,” you get not one, but 30 separate matches. If you search for “Broughton, L,” you get 40.
Forty.
And most of them have few if any donations listed. If you want to find out how much Lenore Broughton has given to whom, you’ll have to open each and every one of those 40 in turn. It’s maddening.
Continue reading
August 1 was another campaign finance deadline, the last before our August 13 state primary. As usual, there was plenty of interesting stuff to be found. And as usual, there was a dearth of coverage in our sadly diminished media ecosystem. VTDigger waited a few days to put together a solid campaign finance database helmed by its longtime (by Digger standards) data reporter Erin Petenko. But any effort, by anyone, to identify trends or develop insights? Haven’t seen any.
Meanwhile, those who follow me on Elon’s Hellscape know why I’m late to the party. After doing a fair bit of spadework around the deadline, I came down with Covid. It was a pretty severe case for a few days and I’m still on the mend, but I feel able to put words on the screen for the first time since last Thursday.
Anyway, got some things to say. Let’s do the toplines first and then get to the details.
The Vermont Political Observer. 